Meet the Other Phone. Flexible and made to last.

Meet the Other Phone.
Flexible and made to last.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

to not allow ds2 to have mmr jab?

862 replies

TheLadyEvenstar · 28/11/2008 22:40

I don't think I am, after ds1 had it i noticed a major difference in his behaviour and don't want to go through it again,

OP posts:
electra · 29/11/2008 14:05

I do understand the theory behind herd immunity, but evidently you find it easier to dismiss my arguments if you think that I do not. If everyone is vaccinated the incidence of a disease will be lower. But this does not justify some children getting damaged as a result. What is needed is a system that we could actually trust and for the government to stop misleading people.

To clarify, my point was this -- that it is not acceptable that we have to take up vaccinations as some sort of social responsibility unless

vaccinations were 100% effective
or
the authorities took responsibility and paid compensation where it went wrong.

electra · 29/11/2008 14:09

and, not or....

myjeansaretootight · 29/11/2008 14:21

Electra, playing devils advocate here but by the same token does social responsibilty extend to parents who choose not have the mmr for their DC's accepting responsibility and paying compensation to any DCs their children infect who may suffer damage?

hambo · 29/11/2008 14:24

Or to the pregnant women who they infect and couse to lose their babies?

hambo · 29/11/2008 14:24

Cause!

electra · 29/11/2008 14:32

Myjeans - I refer you to my argument about social responsibility above.

vjg13 · 29/11/2008 14:36

Electra, there was nothing racist or patronising in the suggestion that not everyone can access the NHS or understand health promotion. Try dealing with patients in any inner city hospital.

Pheebe · 29/11/2008 14:38

I see the discussion around vaccintion has yet again descended into government conspiracy theories

electra · 29/11/2008 14:40

Myjeans - surely a nonsense argument because parents do not have the power to control the passage of a disease. However, the authorities do have it within their power to make decisions that are in people's best interests. But they will not do that because it is easier (and cheaper) to continue with the mantra that vaccinations are beyond question.

The argument that parents who choose not to comply with a suspect and flawed system should be financially liable would represent what it is to live in a fascist regime - not an environment I want my children to grow up in.

electra · 29/11/2008 14:41

Nothing to do with conspiracy theories at all, as I have already said.

ThePregnantHedgeWitch · 29/11/2008 14:45

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn

ThePregnantHedgeWitch · 29/11/2008 14:50

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn

MarlaSinger · 29/11/2008 14:54

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

electra · 29/11/2008 15:01

ThePregnantHedgewitch - that is simply not true. Not all children were born with ASD, some go down that route as the result of a trigger - be it a vaccination, an illness (as I said of someone I know whose child regressed following chicken pox) or something else. In fact I believe there are probably many different routes to it in cases where a child is triggered.

There is an Mner whose child regressed following MMR. As I said, if people can accept that illnesses can trigger regression, why not vaccines?

barnsleybelle · 29/11/2008 15:09

i do believe that it's your child so make your own informed decision.

However, i also believe strongly that proof of vaccination should be compulsary to entering the school system...

I honestly would rather take the risk of my child having a behavioural problem than take the risk of death of mine or any other children in our society.

Both mine had the MMR vaccine at 13 months.

LindenAvery · 29/11/2008 15:12

Check out 'Blind Faith' By Ben Elton.

Does anyone ever consider why reports about potential vaccine side effects come about? Maybe in making a name for yourself? Maybe in receiving funding for further research? Or simply for the good of the general public?

Why does the media investigate such stories? Because it sells newspapers?

Personally had my two done - we are lucky to have access to such vaccines, having seen what happens in some parts of the world were vaccines are not so freely available.

Personal choice - yes fine and having such diseases in this country you also benefit from the NHS care available. However any epidemic threatens such a health system being able to cope - one of the reasons why flu jabs are also offered in this country is because all those vunerable people would probably die if they contracted flu partly because the health service would not cope with the sheer numbers. Measles is said to be highly contagious - infecting up to 90% of close contacts. That's an awful lot of people if the uptake rates continue to fall.

I believe measles is also a 'sleeping disease' in that once contracted it stays with you so even if you make a full recovery at the time - it is still possible you may develop subacute sclerosing panencephalitis (affects the brain) in later life which leads to death. Fortunately this is rare.

Suppose it is all down to responsibility and what each parent has to decide and live with.

MarlaSinger · 29/11/2008 15:14

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

LindenAvery · 29/11/2008 15:17

Single vaccines are an option, however fear may be that it runs the risk of parents not keeping appointments as well as extending the time for children becoming immune to each disease.

Also could be seen if choice was offered by NHS for this type of vaccine is that then showing less confidence in the single MMR one? Could result in even less uptake.

electra · 29/11/2008 15:18

'I honestly wuld rather take the risk of my child having a behavioural problem then take the risk of death of mine or any other children in our society'

barnsleybelle - I don't wish to be unkind, but I think that you are obviously not aware of the impact of having a child with severe autism, or severe brain damage or whatever. I also think that you may not have considered what it would be like to have a child who is developing normally and who is talking and communicating, and who loses all their language and aquired skills almost overnight.

There are many consequences of vaccine damage aside from a behavioural problem...Most of us want our children to grow up to be independent as possible. I only use autism as an example because I have a child who has quite severe autism. Quite aside from worrying about what happens to her when she grows up, I also have had a hard time negotiating the education system and getting what she needs, which happens to everyone who has a child with SN.

barnsleybelle · 29/11/2008 15:20

Electra.... I have an autistic sister....
I would rather live with her and have her as she is than have her die from an illness that she may not have caught were she vaccinated.

VJay · 29/11/2008 15:22

Hi I've not read all the posts, but I gave my ds the single jabs. He was born in 2002 when all the 'ASD link to the MMR' was in the papers, anyway to cut a long story short, he was diagnosed as having an ASD this year. I now realise there is no link between the 2, but that's what life is about, there are no definate answers, and no matter how many trials are done, nothing can be proved to be 100% safe.

barnsleybelle · 29/11/2008 15:22

Oh and my sister was born autistic...
There is no scientific evidence that mmr causes autism etc... There is however scientific evidence that measles can result in death.

CoteDAzur · 29/11/2008 15:22

flightattendant - DD was vaccinated in France. Here, the only single vaccine available is measles, and costs 7 euros (I think. Definitely less than 10 euros). Paediatrician appointment for the vaccination cost 35 euros. So in total, less than 45 euros in total.

jimjamshaslefttheyurt · 29/11/2008 15:23

SSPE also reported after MMR (although rare).

Researching potential vaccine side effects will in the main wipe out your chances of lots of research funding. Most (all?) of the research into vaccines and autism is now parent funded (via Autism Speaks). And that is only very recently.

I haven't vaccinated by younger 2 children with anything yet because they have a severely autistic brother who has immune system irregularities and regressed following a virus. DS3 has the same immune system problems. Which means we're stuffed because either a live virus or a vaccine virus could get him. We've chosen to avoid damaging the immune system further, and to vaccine when older and certain developmental pathways are more ribust.

If you ever end up with a severely disabled child you will find, that you are dumped by the state. The responsibility for that child is entirely yours. Any help you need will have to be fought for.

Would be interested in how many people in this current outbreak have been vaccinated. Does anyone have the figures. I personally suspect there's potentially a time bomb waiting to go off of vaccine induced immunity wearing off and adults being infected. I'm not sure why another booster hasn't been introduced yet.

Ds1 caught rubella from a vaccinated child. His mother didn't know he could have rubella as he had had the MMR. We however knew ds1 had been exposed so stayed in and didn't infect anyone. Social responsibility arguments quickly become ridiculous.

And if we're onto responsibility maybe someone could explain why the government will only compensate a vaccine related death if it occurs in a child aged 2 or over. Under that age. Nothing.

jimjamshaslefttheyurt · 29/11/2008 15:24

barnsley- there also isn't one type of autism. It's a huge mismatch of various conditions.

My son was not born autistic. Not according to his paed anyway who believes his regression was triggered by a virus.